Here: http://bfy.tw/DJ04

The "unique" thing regulars want to have today is low(er) rake.

Could be wrong but I don't believe rake is the nr 1 issue. Site could have 0 rake, but if it's all just nitty regs nut peddling it will die in a matter of months.

I will say the lower the rake the smaller amount of recs you need for a sustainable ecosystem, but you still need recs as nr 1 priority.

Will this site be available to U.S. and ROW player base/pool?

+1

Hey Phil,

Maybe start a project on the blockchain similar to this: https://virtue.poker/ I believe this is the next step for online poker going forward

Yes, true.

However, the most important thing to 'regulars' is how many recs/fish are on the site, and recs/fish don't really know about Rake.

IMO, most of the hard work is to be done to attract recs. Better players will already be there bcoz of Poker community hype.

so they need:
1. big marketing campaign - could easily get **** tonnes of people to sign up quick by asking some popular hearthstone/Dota/whatever other esports game streamers to play some games in between their sessions
2. easy user interface with simple game selection and pretty tables
3. limit amount of game types to begin with, esp in MTT and SnG. Much better to have just 6/9max turbos at various stakes than 6/9max turbo/hyper/slow/KO and not have games running regularly.
4. easy deposit/good bonus (offer a good deposit bonus with bigger workthru)

Those things should attract recreational players, once recs are there then regs will soon come.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise what you just stated! While it is true I really don't see why anybody would argue that lower rake is better and will help recs to go broke a lot slower! Only an idiot would suggest otherwise.

i think the priority is to make a good software

all poker sites except pokerstars looks like software made on 1990

its ridiculous

we are in 2017

United States Postal Service ?

No wonder it's taking a long time.

Welcome to the thread?

That looks so much like Pokerstars strategy
With the difference on 3). Games are limited to what recreationals like, that is Spin&Go, maybe S&G Max now and a bit of MTT.

Any competition is welcome and I wish Rio a lot of success if they launch. The timing of the announcement and significant amount of time without no specific progress being reported I think there is a situation that the new poker site would have to compete with pokerstars to attract recs where marketing funds are very likely nowhere near and who would invest into a declining market with huge risks of legislation changes.

They should buy Merge's software (since Merge doesn't seem to have much use for it anymore). It's the next best software out there and can spread HORSE, 2-7 td, badugi, PL 2-7 td and all the big bet games.

During the Doug Polk interview at about 1:20, Cates was strongly hinting about a big thing coming to online poker soon that would be huge, and it seems obvious he was referring to Phil Galfond's site opening soon.

Honestly a decent way to open a new site would be to get Dwan and Jungleman to finish the Durrrr challenge on it.

Yeah I thought that was the case as well when I heard Jungle talking. He kept almost blurting it out but restrained himself

You expect the market to be low in the summer, so launching Oct 1st would make sense to me, it's the start of a quarter too.

Ecosystem sustainability is not a function of rake. It's a function of re-deposits. Fish (if ever) will deposit once, gets pretty much an instant annihilation (as the skill gap is way too big) by the reg army who cannot wait for RIO poker to start and won't come back.


Number one priority should be playing experience for the fish. I don't mean nice software and beautiful GUI. I mean fish must have good experience while losing (which means they must have a chance to win a session here and there, i.e increase the luck factor in the game). Phil Galfond starting a discussion on changes poker needs just lately is for me an indication that the business case is quite weak.

Any chance RIO will accept bitcoin payments? Right now only some US sites support it, will attract more recs too.

Thats true, you just need to take a quick look at tournaments and csh games running to see that the number is waaaaaaaay inflated

I think its something like 20-30% of what it shows there

But probably its like this on other poker sites as well i really dont know

so jungle couldn't talk about RIO poker, b/c it's a secret? wouldn't it make more sense that one of his billionaire buddies w/ connections to the betting industry plans something covering COM base with the asian market?

Interesting thought man

So excited for RIO to come and possible shat all over Amaya.

Will sit and jrk off to the crocodile tears

is there a ETA on when rio poker will be released?

Yeah, lower rake isn't going to make this site take off. If that's their big selling point, it will be an embarrassing failure. (Is there any evidence that this is their selling point, or are people just guessing?)

I've logged a crapload of online poker hands across many sites, large, medium, and small, since January 2001.

Here's honestly what a site needs to succeed nowadays:

- Games need to get started so fish have somewhere to sit and play. Fish will not wait at an empty table. Therefore, there must be an extreme incentive to get games going, such as extra rakeback for game-starters (the first two players?) if the game eventually gets other players and goes for a minimum amount of time. Or just pay props to get games going.

- End the embarrassing looking lobby with single players hogging up tons of empty tables. For example, disallow the software to create a new table at the same limit unless all tables at that limit have games actually running.

- Aim promotions at fish, rather than regulars.

- Get rid of rakeback BS. Just set the rake at a relatively low, but sustainable level.

- Stay away from the antiquated affiliate model. Spend that money instead on clever and eye-catching marketing.

- Innovate new features which haven't been seen/utilized before on other sites, even if they are just minor and/or gimmicky.

- Have robust software which does not crash, lag, or have stupid errors.

- Provide excellent customer support, staffed by intelligent/semi-intelligent people who are empowered to make common sense decisions. Appoint visible upper-level customer service managers who can be easily contacted in the case something goes wrong. (Pokerstars did this from the start, and look where they are today.)

There's more I could list, but I'll stop here.

I can tell you that, aside from Pokerstars, most of the other sites really don't know what the F they're doing nowadays, especially the new ones which never really get off the ground.